Table REF  summarizes the rollback edit reasons.
We (two authors of this paper) manually investigate the randomly selected 764 (382 questions + 382 answers) rejected edits by rollbacks. We consider the rollback reasons identified by Wang et al. [1]} as the baseline during our analysis. However, we discuss the rollback edit reasons in multiple interactive sessions. We then analyze 200 rollback edits (100 questions + 100 answers) from our selected dataset and label the reasons. For a given rollback edit, we meticulously analyze the texts before and after rollback to see the edits that cause a rollback. Our in-depth investigation exposes a total of nineteen potential reasons. Twelve of them were identified by Wang et al., and the remaining seven are new reasons. The new reasons are – (1) status update, (2) gratitude add/remove, (3) greetings add/remove, (4) signature add/remove, (5) deprecation note add/remove, (6) duplication note add/remove, and (7) community trust. We then measure the agreement using Cohen's Kappa [2]}, [3]}. The value of \(\kappa \) was \(0.98\) , which means the strength of the agreement is almost perfect. Next, we resolve the remaining few disagreements by discussion. However, the agreement level indicates that any coder can do the rest of the labeling without introducing individual bias. Thus, the first author of this paper analyzes the remaining dataset and manually labels the reasons.
